← Back to QA Wiki

Definition of Actual Result

(aka outcome)
The actual result is the outcome obtained after a test is conducted. During the testing phase, the actual result is documented alongside the test case. After all tests, it's compared with the expected outcome, noting any discrepancies.
Thank you!
Was this helpful?

Questions about Actual Result?

Basics and Importance

  • What is the definition of 'Actual Result' in software testing?

    In software testing, the Actual Result is the behavior that is observed when a test is executed. It is the output, response, or state of the application after the test steps have been performed. This result is then compared against the Expected Result to determine if the test has passed or failed. Actual Results are critical for identifying discrepancies that may indicate defects or areas for improvement in the software.

    // Example of capturing Actual Result in an automated test script
    const actualResult = await page.title();

    Actual Results are typically recorded within test management tools or directly in the code of automated tests. They serve as evidence of the test execution and are essential for traceability and accountability in the testing process. When Actual Results deviate from Expected Results, they trigger investigations that can lead to bug fixes and enhancements, ensuring the software meets its requirements and functions as intended.

  • Why is determining the 'Actual Result' important in e2e testing?

    Determining the Actual Result in end-to-end (e2e) testing is crucial for validating the integrity of the entire application flow. It ensures that each integrated component functions as expected when operated in sequence, from start to finish. By comparing the Actual Result with the Expected Result, testers can confirm whether the system behaves as designed under various conditions, including user interactions, data processing, and connectivity.

    In e2e testing, the Actual Result is the outcome of the test execution. It provides a concrete basis for assessing the system's compliance with business requirements and user needs. When discrepancies arise, they highlight potential issues that could impact the user experience or system reliability, prompting further investigation and refinement.

    Moreover, the Actual Result is instrumental in maintaining test credibility. It offers tangible evidence for stakeholders regarding the system's current state and the effectiveness of the testing strategy. This transparency is essential for building confidence in the software's quality and for making informed decisions about releases and deployments.

    In automated testing, capturing the Actual Result is typically handled by the automation framework, which records the outcomes for subsequent analysis. This automated capture not only streamlines the testing process but also reduces human error, ensuring that results are reported consistently and accurately.

    // Example of capturing Actual Result in an automated test
    const actualResult = await performTestAction();
    assert.equal(actualResult, expectedResult, 'The actual result does not match the expected result.');

    By focusing on the Actual Result, test automation engineers can directly influence the software's development cycle, ensuring that each release meets the quality standards necessary for a successful product.

  • How does the 'Actual Result' contribute to the overall testing process?

    The Actual Result is pivotal in the testing process as it serves as a direct indicator of the system's current behavior under test conditions. By comparing the Actual Result with the Expected Result, testers can immediately discern whether a test case has passed or failed. This comparison is essential for validating the software's functionality and ensuring that it meets the specified requirements.

    In automated testing, the Actual Result is often captured and logged by the test scripts, which then automatically compare it to the Expected Result. This facilitates a rapid feedback loop, allowing for quick identification of failures and enabling continuous integration and delivery pipelines to proceed or halt based on test outcomes.

    When discrepancies arise, the Actual Result is the starting point for debugging. It helps pinpoint the exact nature of a defect, guiding developers towards the underlying cause. Moreover, analyzing patterns in Actual Results across multiple test runs can reveal larger issues such as performance degradation or instability in certain areas of the application.

    In summary, the Actual Result is crucial for:

    • Verifying software behavior against expectations.
    • Automating pass/fail decisions in test scripts.
    • Debugging by providing concrete evidence of system behavior.
    • Analyzing trends and patterns to inform future development and testing efforts.

    By leveraging the Actual Result effectively, teams can maintain high software quality and accelerate the development lifecycle.

Comparison and Contrast

  • What is the difference between 'Expected Result' and 'Actual Result'?

    In software test automation, Expected Result is the predefined outcome of a test case, based on the requirements or design specifications. It represents the behavior that the system should exhibit under certain conditions.

    Actual Result, on the other hand, is the behavior that the system actually exhibits when the test case is executed. It is the real-time outcome obtained from the system under test.

    The comparison between Expected and Actual Results is crucial for determining the success or failure of a test case. A match indicates that the system behaves as intended, while a mismatch may reveal a defect or a deviation from the expected behavior. This comparison is often automated in test scripts, where assertions or checkpoints are used to validate that the Actual Result aligns with the Expected Result.

    // Example of an assertion in a test script
    assert.equal(actualResult, expectedResult, 'The actual result does not match the expected result');

    Discrepancies between these results trigger further investigation to understand the root cause and to rectify any issues, ensuring that the software meets its quality standards.

  • How does the 'Actual Result' relate to the 'Test Case'?

    In the context of a Test Case, the Actual Result is the outcome observed when the test is executed. It is directly compared against the Expected Result to determine if the test has passed or failed. This comparison is crucial for validating the behavior of the software under test.

    For automated tests, the Actual Result is typically captured by the test script itself. For instance, in a Selenium-based test, the script might include assertions like:

    assertEquals("Expected text", element.getText());

    Here, element.getText() is the Actual Result that is compared to the expected text. If they match, the test passes; otherwise, it fails.

    The Actual Result is essential for pinpointing the exact step where a failure occurs within a Test Case. In complex scenarios, it helps in isolating the defect to a specific module or functionality. Moreover, when a test fails, the Actual Result can provide insights into the nature of the bug, which aids in debugging and fixing the issue.

    In continuous integration environments, the Actual Result is often logged and made part of the test reports. This information is valuable for stakeholders to understand the current state of the software and for developers to address any issues before the software is released.

  • In what scenarios might the 'Actual Result' differ from the 'Expected Result'?

    Actual Result may differ from Expected Result due to various reasons:

    • Code Defects: Bugs in the application code can lead to unexpected behavior.
    • Environment Issues: Discrepancies in test environments, such as differences in configurations, databases, or network conditions.
    • Test Data Variability: Inconsistent or incorrect test data can yield different outcomes.
    • Flaky Tests: Tests that exhibit non-deterministic behavior often fail intermittently.
    • Incorrect Expectations: The expected result might be based on outdated or misunderstood requirements.
    • Concurrency Issues: Problems that only manifest when multiple processes or users are interacting with the system simultaneously.
    • Integration Dependencies: Failures in external services or components that the application relies on.
    • Timing Issues: Race conditions or timeouts that affect the application's behavior.
    • Platform-Specific Behavior: Variations in how different operating systems, browsers, or devices handle certain operations.
    • Test Script Errors: Mistakes in the automation scripts themselves, such as incorrect assertions or synchronization issues.

    Identifying the cause of the discrepancy is crucial for resolving issues and improving the software quality.

Practical Application

  • How is the 'Actual Result' documented during the testing process?

    Documenting the Actual Result during the testing process typically involves a clear and concise description of the system's behavior after test execution. It's recorded in a test management tool or a test case document, often alongside the corresponding Test Case and Expected Result for easy comparison.

    Here's a general approach:

    1. Execute the Test Case: Run the test as per the steps outlined.
    2. Observe: Carefully observe the system's behavior or output.
    3. Record: Immediately document the observed behavior. Use clear language to describe what happened, including any error messages, system responses, or outcomes.
    4. Screenshots/Logs: Attach screenshots, log files, or videos if they add clarity, especially for UI issues or complex errors.
    5. Timestamp: Note the time and date of the test, as this can be crucial for debugging.
    6. Environment Details: Include specifics about the test environment, such as browser version, device, or system configuration.
    7. Reproducibility: Indicate if the result is consistent upon retesting.
    8. Link Defects: If the result indicates a defect, create a bug report and link it to the test case for traceability.
    // Example of documenting an Actual Result in a test case template:
      Test Case ID: TC_101,
      Test Steps: "Enter 'admin' in the username field and 'password123' in the password field. Click 'Login'.",
      Expected Result: "User is directed to the dashboard.",
      Actual Result: "Error message 'Invalid credentials' displayed. User not logged in.",
      Timestamp: "2023-04-01 10:30 UTC",
      Environment: "Chrome 89 on Windows 10",
      Reproducible: "Yes",
      Defect ID: "BUG_204"

    Ensure that the Actual Result is detailed enough to enable developers to understand the issue without ambiguity, facilitating quicker resolution and retesting.

  • What are some common tools or methods used to capture the 'Actual Result'?

    Capturing the Actual Result in test automation typically involves several tools and methods:

    • Automated Test Scripts: Scripts written in frameworks like Selenium, Cypress, or Appium automatically capture output during test execution. For example:

      let actualResult = element.getText();
    • Logging: Automated tests are often designed to log results and errors. Tools like Log4j for Java or Winston for Node.js can be used to log actual outcomes.

    • Screenshots: Tools like Selenium can take screenshots of the application state when a test step is performed, which is useful for UI tests.

    • Video Recording: Some test frameworks, like TestCafe or cloud services like Sauce Labs, offer video recording features to capture the test execution.

    • API Responses: For API testing, tools like Postman or RestAssured capture the HTTP response data, which represents the actual result.

    • Performance Data: Tools like JMeter or Gatling capture timing and throughput data as actual results for performance testing.

    • Test Reports: Frameworks like JUnit, TestNG, or Mocha generate reports that include actual results. These can be further integrated with CI/CD tools like Jenkins or GitLab CI for comprehensive reporting.

    • Custom Handlers: Implementing custom event handlers or callbacks within the test code to capture specific data points or states of the application.

    • Database Validation: Directly querying the database using SQL or NoSQL commands to capture data changes.

    • File Output: Writing results to a file, such as CSV or JSON, which can be parsed and analyzed later.

    Each method is chosen based on the context of what needs to be captured and the type of test being executed.

  • How can the 'Actual Result' be used to identify and diagnose software bugs or issues?

    The Actual Result serves as a critical diagnostic tool in identifying and troubleshooting software bugs. When a test case execution yields an Actual Result that deviates from the Expected Result, this discrepancy flags a potential defect in the software.

    To diagnose issues, engineers analyze the Actual Result in the context of the test environment and input data. They may look for patterns or inconsistencies in the results across different test cases or conditions. For instance, if a feature works as expected under one set of inputs but not another, this could indicate a boundary case issue or a data handling bug.

    Engineers also use the Actual Result to pinpoint the exact step where the failure occurred. By examining the state of the application at this point, including logs, stack traces, or database states, they can identify the underlying cause of the failure.

    In cases where the Actual Result indicates a performance issue, such as slower response times or resource bottlenecks, engineers can use profiling tools to drill down into the system's behavior at the time of the test.

    Automated testing frameworks often provide features to capture and report detailed Actual Results, including screenshots or video recordings of the test execution, which can be invaluable for diagnosing UI issues.

    By methodically analyzing the Actual Result, engineers can formulate hypotheses about the source of the bug, which can then be tested and verified, leading to a more efficient bug-fixing process.

Advanced Concepts

  • How does the 'Actual Result' factor into regression testing?

    In regression testing, the Actual Result is crucial for verifying that recent code changes have not adversely affected existing functionality. It serves as the outcome of a test case after the software has been modified. By comparing the Actual Result with the Expected Result, testers can determine whether a regression error has occurred.

    For automated regression tests, the Actual Result is typically captured by the test scripts and compared against the Expected Result programmatically. Discrepancies trigger test failures, alerting engineers to potential regressions. This comparison is often done through assertions in the test code:

    assert.equal(actualResult, expectedResult, 'The actual result does not match the expected result.');

    When the Actual Result matches the Expected Result, it indicates that the application's behavior remains consistent with its previous state. Conversely, a mismatch may signal a defect introduced by recent changes, necessitating further investigation and potential code fixes.

    In continuous integration environments, the Actual Result is part of the feedback loop, informing development teams about the stability of their application after each code commit. This immediate feedback is essential for maintaining software quality and accelerating the development cycle.

    Automated regression tests with clear Actual Results enable quick identification of the specific functionality that has regressed, streamlining the debugging process and ensuring that software releases meet quality standards.

  • What role does the 'Actual Result' play in automated testing?

    In automated testing, the Actual Result serves as a critical data point for validating software behavior against expected outcomes. It is the output produced by the test script when it is executed. This result is then automatically compared to the Expected Result to determine if the test has passed or failed.

    // Example of capturing Actual Result in an automated test
    const actualResult = performAction();
    assert.equal(actualResult, expectedResult, 'Test failed: Actual result does not match expected result.');

    The Actual Result is essential for pinpointing the exact step where a discrepancy occurs, especially in complex test scenarios. When a test fails, the Actual Result provides immediate feedback on the nature of the failure, allowing engineers to initiate debugging and root cause analysis without manual intervention.

    Automated tests often log the Actual Result to a report or dashboard, providing a historical record of test executions. This facilitates trend analysis and helps in understanding the stability of the software over time.

    In continuous integration and deployment (CI/CD) pipelines, the Actual Result can trigger workflows such as notifications, rollbacks, or additional test suites, depending on the success or failure of the test cases.

    Overall, the Actual Result is a cornerstone of test automation, enabling efficient and accurate validation of software functionality, and driving quality assurance processes in a systematic and scalable manner.

  • How can 'Actual Result' discrepancies contribute to software optimization and improvement?

    Discrepancies between Actual Results and Expected Results are critical for software optimization and improvement. When the actual outcome of a test case deviates from what was anticipated, it signals a potential flaw or area for enhancement. These discrepancies can lead to:

    • Refinement of requirements: Inconsistencies may reveal misunderstandings or gaps in the requirements, prompting clearer and more precise specifications.
    • Code optimization: Performance issues or unexpected behaviors exposed during testing can guide developers to optimize algorithms and refactor code.
    • Enhanced user experience: Actual results that differ in the user interface or workflows can highlight usability issues, leading to improvements that make the software more intuitive and user-friendly.
    • Better error handling: Encountering errors or exceptions not accounted for in expected results can improve the robustness of the software by enhancing error handling and messaging.
    • Increased test coverage: Discrepancies often reveal untested paths or edge cases, expanding the test suite for more comprehensive coverage.

    By analyzing these discrepancies, teams can iteratively refine their software, leading to a more reliable, performant, and user-centric product. It's essential to document and track these findings to ensure they are addressed in future development cycles.

AboutQuestionsDiscord ForumBrowser ExtensionTagsQA Jobs

Rayrun is a community for QA engineers. I am constantly looking for new ways to add value to people learning Playwright and other browser automation frameworks. If you have feedback, email luc@ray.run.